FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Q: Under FP7, if a Principal Investigator's salary is not charged to the ERC grant, is (s)he expected to keep time records?

A:

Although in principle Principal Investigators do not need to keep time records if their salary is not charged to an FP7 ERC grant, they should be able to provide evidence of their compliance with the time commitment requirements provided in the corresponding Work Programme (see ERC Work Programmes here).

Q: For ERC projects under FP7, is the use of timesheets mandatory?

A:

In FP7, costs of actual hours worked should be substantiated by a time recording system or by alternative evidence providing the same level of reliability as to the reality, accuracy and completeness of the information provided, to allow auditors to verify the financial reports.If a person works 100% on a project and has a contract to this effect, in the absence of timesheets, other appropriate and sufficient alternative evidence to support the declared work arrangements should be provided, provided that it is compliant with the usual practices of the beneficiary.

Q: For ERC projects under FP7, is there a minimum time to be spent on the office premises by the staff recruited for the project so that staff costs are eligible?

A:

For FP7 projects, the time necessary to be spent in the office by the staff recruited for the project depends on the rules of the Host Institution and the applicable national legislation. However, according to Article II.15.1 of the General Conditions to the ERC Grant Agreements (Single and Multi-Beneficiary), only the costs of the actual hours worked by the persons directly carrying out work under the project can be charged.

Q: Under FP7, can a retired researcher be paid out of an ERC grant? Which form can the payment take?

A:

In FP7, payments for retired researchers can be charged to the project if they are in line with applicable national law and practice, as well as with the specific rules applicable to and in the Host Institution.
Costs must also be compliant with the eligibility criteria of Article II.14 of the General Conditions to the ERC Grant Agreement (Single and Multi-Beneficiary).
The payments should be made via the Human Resources Payroll system.

Q: Are the open access related rules that apply to ERC grantee any different from those that apply to researchers funded under the rest of Horizon 2020?

A:

Indeed, although most of the rules applicable to other researchers funded under Horizon 2020 also apply in the same way to researchers funded by the ERC, there are a number of differences. In particular, in the case of the ERC the open access obligations described in Article 29.2 of the Model Grant Agreement apply not only to articles in scientific journals, but also to long-text publications such as monographs, edited volumes, or book chapters.
An overview of the open access related rules for ERC funded researchers can be found on the ERC website. Note that Article 29.2 of the ERC Model Grant Agreement is slightly different from the corresponding article in the general Horizon 2020 Model Grant Agreement. Details on the application of the article to ERC grants can be found in the ERC specific part of the Annotated Model Grant Agreement.

Q: What type of feedback will I be receiving during and after the evaluation of my proposal submitted to the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call?

A:

During each step of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 evaluation, the two main elements of the proposal (Principal Investigator and research project) will be evaluated and rated. At the end of each evaluation step the proposals will be ranked by the panels on the basis of the marks they have received and on the panels' overall appreciation of each proposal's strengths and weaknesses.
At the end of Step 1 of the evaluation, on the basis of the assessment of Part B1 of the proposal, applicants will be informed that their proposal:
A. is of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation;
B. is of high quality but not sufficient to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation; or
C. is not of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation.

At the end of Step 2 of the evaluation, on the basis of the assessment of the full proposal, applicants will be informed that their proposal either:
A. fully meets the ERC's excellence criterion and is recommended for funding if sufficient funds are available; or
B. meets some but not all elements of the ERC's excellence criterion and will not be funded.

More information on the results of the peer review evaluation can be found at section 3.7 of the ERC Rules for Submission and Evaluation.
Applicants may also be subject to restrictions on submitting proposals to future ERC calls based on the outcome of the evaluation. Applicants will need to check the restrictions in place for each call (see restrictions on submission of proposals under 'Eligibility criteria'of the ERC Work Programme 2018).
In addition, once the evaluation of their proposal has been completed, applicants will receive an evaluation report which will include the ranking range of their proposal out of the proposals evaluated by the panel (for more details, see Information for applicants to the Starting and Consolidator Grant 2018 Calls).

More information on the evaluation procedure can also be found in the ERC Work Programme 2018 section relevant to the call.

Q: Should the applicant provide the names and the Curriculum Vitae (CV) of the team members in the proposal for the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call?

A:

The CVs of individual team members should not be included. Although, it is not mandatory to provide the names of individual team members, the proposal should describe the composition of the team that will carry out the proposed activities.
Further explanations can be found in the Information for the applicants of the Starting and Consolidator 2018 Grants.

Q: Do peer reviewers receive all parts of a proposal in the case of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call?

A:

For the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018, Step 1 of the peer review evaluation process is based only on the extended synopsis, the Principal Investigator's CV and the track record (Part B1 only), and peer reviewers do not have access to the full scientific proposal. At Step 2, the peer reviewers base their assessment on the complete version of the retained proposals, including the full scientific proposal (Part B2).
For more information on the evaluation process, please refer to the ERC Work Programme 2018 (section 'Evaluation procedure and criteria').

Q: According to the conditions applied to the ERC frontier research Grants 2018 (Starting / Consolidator / Advanced / Synergy), can a researcher participate as Principal Investigator in more than one ERC frontier research proposal at the same time?

A:

There are three main restrictions to be considered for Principal Investigators in this regard:
A Principal Investigator may submit proposals to different ERC frontier research grant calls made under the same Work Programme, but only the first eligible proposal will be evaluated.
A researcher may participate as Principal Investigator in only one ERC frontier research project at any one time (NB: A new frontier research project can only start after the duration of the project fixed in a previous frontier research grant agreement has ended).
A researcher participating as Principal Investigator in an ERC frontier research project may not submit a proposal for another ERC frontier research grant, unless the existing project ends no more than two years after the call deadline.

These restrictions are specified in the ERC Work Programme 2018 and may be modified in future work programmes by the ERC Scientific Council in light of experience. As a team member, it is possible to participate in more than one ERC grant.

Q: According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call, is a Principal Investigator holding a Master Degree and no PhD entitled to apply to this call?

A:

No, according to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, the Principal Investigator must have been awarded a PhD or equivalent doctoral degree to be eligible. First-professional degrees will not be considered in themselves as PhD-equivalent, even if recipients carry the title "Doctor".
For more information, please, consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2018, Annex 2.

Q: According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call, for medical doctors who hold both a medical doctor degree and a PhD, which degree will be taken into consideration for the calculation of the eligibility window?

A:

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, for medical doctors who have been awarded both a medical doctor degree and a PhD, the date of the earliest degree that makes the applicant eligible takes precedence in the calculation of the eligibility time-window (7-12 years after the date of award of the PhD or 9-14 years past the medical doctor degree completion for Consolidators).
For more information, please, consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2018 – Annex 2.

Q: According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call, what degrees are considered equivalent to a PhD?

A:

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, in order to be eligible to apply a Principal Investigator must have been awarded a PhD or equivalent doctoral degree. It is recognised that in certain fields some other doctoral titles have the same status and represent variants of the PhD. All of them have similar content requirements. These cases will be examined individually, as part of the ERCEA's decision on eligibility. First professional degrees will not be considered in themselves as PhD-equivalent, even if mentioning the title "Doctor".
For more information, please, consult the ERC policy on PhD and equivalent doctoral degrees in the ERC Work Programme 2018 - Annex 2.

Q: According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call, is a Medical Doctor degree equivalent to a PhD degree?

A:

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, for medical doctors (or applicants holding a degree in medicine), a medical doctor degree will not be accepted by itself as equivalent to a PhD award. To be considered an eligible Principal Investigator, medical doctors (or applicants holding a degree in medicine) need to provide the certificates of both a medical doctor degree and a PhD or proof of an appointment that requires doctoral equivalency (e.g. post-doctoral fellowship, professorship appointment). Additionally, candidates must also provide information on their research experience (including peer reviewed publications) in order to further substantiate the equivalence of their overall training to a PhD. In these cases, the certified date of the medical doctor degree completion plus two years is the time reference for calculation of the eligibility time-window (i.e. 9-14 years past the medical doctor degree for Consolidators).
For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2018.

Q: According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call, what will happen if the PhD certificate is not submitted together with the proposal?

A:

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, as long as no PhD document or equivalent is uploaded in the Participant Portal Submission Service, it will not be possible to validate/submit the proposal. A warning message will inform the applicant of the missing document. If another document is uploaded instead and the PhD certificate is finally missing in the proposal, the proposal is not eligible and will not be evaluated.
For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2018 .

Q: According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call, which is the date to be considered for the granting of the PhD (or equivalent degree)?

A:

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, the reference date for calculating the eligibility period should be the date of the actual award according to the national rules in the country where the degree was awarded.
In the case of applicants having been awarded several PhDs, the reference date is the award date of the first PhD.
For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2018.

Q: According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 (ERC-2018-CoG) call, what are eligible career breaks that are considered for the extension of the eligibility window?

A:

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, eligible career breaks that can be considered for the extension of the eligibility window are:- Maternity or paternity leave,
- Long-term illness (over ninety days for the Principal Investigator - PI - or a close family member),
- Clinical training,
- National service.
All these circumstances need to be properly documented. Please, find below examples of such documents:
For maternity: a birth certificate/passport of the child(ren), family book or any other official document where the link between the PI and the child(ren) is indicated.
For paternity leave taken: an official testimonial from employer or state benefit record certifying the actual duration of the paternity leave. The total number of days and the exact dates need to be specified. Part-time paternity leave is also accepted.
For clinical training: (an) official testimonial(s) certifying the actual duration(s) of the clinical (specialty) training(s).
For long-term illness (over ninety days),the documentation of the periods of medical / sick leaves must be issued by an official authority (e.g. the applicant's employer, health insurances, etc.) or by an authorised person such as the physician of the applicant (medical certificates).
For national service: only the documented amount of leave taken for national service will be considered if they are issued by an official authority.
For more information, see section 'Eligibility criteria' of the ERC Work Programme 2018.

According to the conditions of the ERC Consolidator Grant 2018 call, the applicant must choose a primary evaluation panel and may also indicate a secondary evaluation panel. They should indicate when they believe that their proposal is of a cross-panel or cross-domain nature. In most cases the proposal will be evaluated by the primary panel indicated by the applicant. However, if the scope of a proposal does not correspond to the expertise of the primary panel, the proposal can be reallocated to another panel, if the panel chairs of the original and the new panel unanimously agree to do so.
Further explanations can be found in the Information for the applicants of the Starting and Consolidator 2018 Grants. The primary panel structure and description is also described in Annex 1 of the ERC Work Programme 2018.

Q: For ERC projects under FP7, can the Principal Investigator sign timesheets for him/herself?

A:

A Principal Investigator should not validate his/her own timesheet because the person validating a timesheet should have an independent view of the work of the Principal Investigator within the Host Institution (e.g. the Principal Investigator's hierarchical superior).

Q: For ERC projects under FP7, does the Principal Investigator need to dedicate an equal proportion of his/her working time each year to the project?

A:

Under FP7, the Principal Investigator is not obliged to spend an equal amount of his/her working time each year on the project, as long as the distribution is in line with achieving the scientific objectives of the project. However, ERCEA encourages an even distribution throughout the duration of the project. Any special time arrangements need to be agreed with the ERCEA beforehand.Timesheets or other means of proof must reflect the actual productive hours spent on the project.